i 


Reprinted  fromiArt  in  America. 
June,  1917.   v. 5,  no,4. 


VS  r 


V 


TWO      GERMAN      TAPESTRIES      AFTER      MICHAEL 
WOLGEMUTH      •     BY   RUDOLF   MEYER   RIEFSTAHL 

/) 

THE  German  tapestries  of  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries 
have  scarcely  been  studied.  Since  the  few  notes  of  Miintz^ 
in  his  "Histoire  generale  de  la  Tapisserie,"  and  since  Lessing's 
•'Wandteppiche  und  Decken  des  Mittelalters  in  Deutschland,"  ^ 
nothing  of  importance  has  been  published.  German  tapestries  cer- 
tainly are  not  as  rich  and  beautiful  as  are  those  from  Northern 
France  and  Flanders;  they  never  had  the  international  importance 
of  the  ''Arazzi,"  but  follow  a  modest  local  tradition  of  charming 
naivete  and  originality. 

One  of  the  problems  connected  with  the  history  of  German 
tapestry  is  the  question  whether  or  not  German  artists,  like  Wolge- 
muth,  Diirer  and  Holbein,  have  designed  cartoons  for  tapestry 
weaving.  This  problem  was  recognized  in  1843  by  Waagen,^  who 
noted  the  style  of  Wolgemuth  in  a  tapestry  of  the  Adoration  of  the 
Magi,  formerly  in  the  Reider  Collection  in  Bamberg,  Bavaria,  now 
in  the  National  Museum  in  Munich.  Waagen's  observation  has 
been  repeated  by  Rettberg,'*  Muentz,''  and  Otto  von  Falke;^  it  has 
been  criticised  by  Guififrey,'  who  says  in  his  history  of  tapestry  from 
the  twelfth  to  the  sixteenth  centuries:  "It  is  a  mere  hypothesis  to 
attribute  the  model  of  the  Munich  tapestry  to  Wolgemuth.  We  have 
to  wait  for  more  convincing  proofs  than  those  which  have  been 
brought  forward  hitherto  to  give  evidence  that  Wolgemuth,  Diirer 
and  Holbein  were  asked  to  work  for  the  tapestry  weave'rs.  The 
thing  itself  is  not  unlikely,  but  we  have  no  certitude,  and  we  will 
perhaps  never  get  it." 

Guiflfrey's  observation  was  right:  an  undisputable  connection  of 
German  tapestry  art  with  the  work  of  one  of  these  masters  had  not  yet 
been  proved.  We  have  succeeded  in  furnishing  this  proof  at  least 
for  Michael  Wolgemuth,  the  master  of  Diirer.  We  have  found 
two  German  tapestries  which  are  exact  copies  of  works  of  Wolge- 
muth; the  copy  is  so  exact  and  so  identical  in  method  that  both 

1  Eugene  Miintz,  Histoire  generale  de  la  Tapisserie,  Allemagne,  p.  8. 

2  Julius  Lessing,  Wandteppiche  und  Decken  des  Mittelalters  in  Deutschland. 

3  G.  F.  Waagen,  Kunstwerke  und  Kiinstler  in  Deutschland,  vol.  I,  Leipzig  1843,  p.  117. 
*  V.  Rettberg,  Niirnberger  Briefe,  Hannover  1846,  p.  150. 

6  Eugene  Miintz,  La  Tapisserie   (Bibliotheque  de  I'enseignement  des  Beaux  Arts),  pp. 
175-176. 

6  O.  V.  Falke  in  Lehnert,  Illustrierte  Geschichte  des  Kunstgewerbes,  I,  p.  347. 

7  Jules  Guiffrey,  Les  tapisseries  du  12e  a  la  fin  du  16e  siecle,  p.  173. 

i8i 


360560 


tapestries  must  have  come  from  the  same  loom.  The  first  be- 
longs to  the  collection  of  Miss  C.  Timkin  in  New  York;  we  are 
obliged  to  Miss  Timkin,  who  kindly  permitted  a  close  examination 
of  her  tapestry.  The  second  tapestry  was  published  in  the  Burling- 
ton Magazine,  November,  1907.^  Gaston  Migeon^  stated  that  it  had 
passed  to  the  Metropolitan  Museum  in  New  York;  the  tapestry  is 
not  there,  and  we  do  not  know  its  present  whereabouts. 

Both  tapestries  are  direct  copies  of  woodcuts  by  Wolgemuth 
and  Pleydenwurfif  in  the  famous  Niirnberg  Chronicle  by  Hart- 
man  Schedel,  published  in  1493  by  Anton  Koberger,  the  great  Niirn- 
berg editor.^  Both  tapestries  are  consequently  not  made  after  car- 
toons by  Wolgemuth,  but  they  give  evidence  that  Wolgemuth's 
illustrations  of  the  Chronicle  have  inspired  the  German  tapestry 
weavers.  It  is  well  known  that  a  similar  relation  exists  between  the 
French  miniature  painters  and  the  French  masters  of  haute-lisse, 
and  we  hope  to  publish  very  soon  a  series  of  Italian  tapestries  of  the 
fourteenth  century  in  which  a  similar  relation  can  be  stated  between 
the  fresco  painters  of  the  School  of  Giotto  and  the  earliest  Italian 
tapestries.  It  is  not  astonishing  that  a  famous  book  like  the  Niirn- 
berg Chronicle  became  a  source  of  inspiration  for  the  tapestry  weav- 
ers. The  German  weavers  of  the  fifteenth  century  were  far  from 
having  a  huge  organization,  like  those  of  Flanders  and  Northern 
France.  A  certain  number  of  the  German  tapestries  must  have  been 
made  in  convents;  two  tapestries,  one  in  the  National  Museum  in 
Munich,  the  other  belonging  to  the  Cathedral  in  Bamberg,  show 
in  one  corner  a  nun  sitting  before  the  tapestry  loom;  others  may  have 
been  woven  by  skilful  housewives  in  cities  and  castles,  and  we  know 
also  that  in  cities  like  Basel  or  Niirnberg,  weaving  was  done  in  a 
professional  way  on  a  small  scale. 

The  tapestry  belonging  to  Miss  Timkin  (Fig.  i)  represents  the 
Judgment  of  Solomon.  It  is  55  inches  high  and  96  inches  wide. 
It  is  of  medium  quality  and  there  are  eleven  or  twelve  warp  threads 
to  the  inch.  The  tapestry  is  executed  in  wool ;  silk  is  not  employed 
except  in  some  modern  repair.  A  good  quantity  of  silver  thread 
has  been  used  to  mark  the  lights  on  garments  and  headdresses.    The 

1  C.  H.  W.  in  Burlington  Magazine,  XII,  Nov.,  1907,  p.  101. 

2  Gaston  Migeon,  Les  arts  du  tissu,  p.  264. 

3  Liber  chronicarum  by  Hartman  Schedel :  "Hunc  librum  dominus  Anthonius  Koberger 
Nuremberge  impressit.  Adhibitis  tamen  vivis  mathematicis  pingendique  arte  peritissimis, 
Michaele  Wolgemuth  et  Wilhelmo  pleydenwurff.  .  .  .  Consummatum  autem  duodecima 
mensis  julii  anno  salutis  nostre  1493." 

182 


-^  ii 


X 

< 

H 

n 


o    O  ■< 

?  w  g 

>  > 

>    M  13 

^  ^  lis 


r-   H 


•  •• 


S  '-' 

Ex]  ^ 

K  (J 

CO  o 

f-  < 

<  u 

O  CD 

as 

^  Q 


D 
Q 


« 


tapestry  is  in  a  good  state  of  preservation  and  is  without  the  least 
doubt  a  weave  of  the  late  fifteenth  or  early  sixteenth  century.    The 
number  of  colors  employed  is  not  very  great:  we  count  dark  blue, 
medium  blue,  light  blue,  dark  green,  medium  green,  yellow  and  pale 
yellow,  dark  brown,  medium  brown,  light  brown,  dark  crimson,  light 
crimson,   vermilion   and   light  vermilion,    light  mauve   and    pink. 
Black  seems  to  be  employed  only  in  the  restoration.     The  silver 
thread  is  a  silk  thread  overspun  with  thin  flat  metal  wire.     With 
these  few  colors  a  considerable  number  of  shades  have  been  obtained 
by  elaborate  hatchings.     Sometimes  two  threads  of  different  color 
are  twisted  together  and  then  employed;  in  other  cases  two  or  four 
threads'of  different  shades  are  alternately  interwoven,  forming  thus 
the  shade  intended  by  the  weaver.     The  tapestry  is  surrounded 
by  an  old  border  of  plain  red,  green  and  light  yellow  stripes.    On 
the  upper  side  is  a  border  of  scroll  work  with  grapes,  which  we 
find  also  on  the  left  and  right  side.    On  the  bottom  of  the  tapestry 
this  scroll-work  border  has  not  been  added  by  the  weaver.     The 
composition  itself  is  an  exact  copy  of  a  woodcut  by  Wolgemuth  in 
the   Niirnberg   Chronicle,   folio   47b    (Fig.   2).     All    the   details, 
including  the  brocade  behind  the  throne  of  Solomon,  the  glass  win- 
dows in  the  background,  and  the  costumes,  have  been  taken  over 
by  the  tapestry  weaver,  who  added  his  own  coloring.     Only  one 
figure  has  been  added  in  the  left  corner  of  the  tapestry  to  balance 
the  composition,  a  huge  bearded  Turk  holding  a  large  sword.    This 
figure,  too,  has  been  borrowed  from  another  woodcut  in  the  Niirn- 
berg   Chronicle,    representing    Mahomet,    folio    151b     (Fig.    3). 
There  this  personage  seems  to  be  a  bodyguard  of  ''Machometus  homo 
perniciosissimus,"  as  he  is  called  by  Hartman  Schedel.    This  attend- 
ant of  Mahomet  is  given  reversed  on  the  tapestry.     The  scene  of 
the  Judgment  itself  is  reproduced  without  changing  the  right  and 
the  left  of  the  original. 

The  second  tapestry  (Fig.  6)  was  published  by  C.  H.  W.  in 
the  Burlington  Magazine,  November,  1907,  page  loi.  Our  repro- 
duction is  made  after  that  of  the  Burlington  Magazine.  The  tapes- 
try is  said  to  have  been  discovered  in  a  crypt  of  a  church  in  Spain. 
The  whole  article  by  C.  H.  W.  is  extremely  superficial  and  incon- 
sistent. The  main  part  of  the  article  is  a  long,  tedious  historical 
research  which  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the  tapestry  belongs  to 
a  scries  of  tapestries  representing  the  most  important  events  of  the 

187 


reign  of  the  German  emperor  Frederick  III  (1452-1493).  The 
tapestry  is  the  representation  of  the  Coronation  of  the  Emperor 
(1452).  The  emperor  was  crowned  by  Pope  Nicholas  V,  and  not 
by  Enea  Sylvio  Piccolomini,  who  became  pope  only  in  1458.  But 
as  a  number  of  years  had  elapsed  since  this  coronation,  the  tapestry 
weaver  put  Enea  on  the  tapestry  instead  of  Nicholas  V.  The  Mar- 
grave of  Brandenburg  is  represented  with  the  coat  of  arms  of  Saxony. 
C.  H.  W.  explains  this  by  the  statement  "that  the  Margravate  of 
Brandenburg,  until  it  came  into  the  possession  of  the  ancestor  of 
the  present  German  Emperor,  was  part  of  the  Kingdom  of  Saxony. 
Fortunately  the  identification  of  this  personage  is  not  essential.  The 
Saxon  arms  and  the  electoral  cap  sufficiently  declare  his  position  in 
the  empire."  The  author  then  concludes:  "The  style  is  decidedly 
characteristic  of  Flemish  work  of  the  second  half  of  the  fifteenth 
century,  although  the  general  conception  of  the  design  and  the  exe- 
cution of  the  details  are  inferior  to  that  of  the  best  specimens  of  the 
Flemish  tapestry  weavers'  art  of  that  period." 

All  this  is  wrong.  A  look  at  the  photograph  shows  that  the 
design  of  this  tapestry  is  typically  German,  and  the  entire  historical 
dissertation  is  useless.  The  presence  of  Enea  Sylvio  Piccolomini  and 
Frederick  III  is  explained  very  simply  by  the  fact  that  the  entire 
scene  with  all  the  details,  including  the  brocade  in  the  background, 
is  copied  from  the  woodcut  (Fig.  4)  in  Hartman  Schedel's  Chron- 
icle, on  folio  267b.  In  the  last  part  of  the  Chronicle  the  learned 
Niirnberg  doctor  gives  an  extract  from  a  work  which  Enea  Sylvio 
published  in  1458  about  remarkable  events  in  Germany  and  Europe 
in  the  time  of  Frederick  III.  This  part  of  the  Chronicle  is  opened 
by  a  very  fine  full-page  woodcut  in  which  the  pope  and  the  emperor 
are  represented  sitting  together  on  the  same  throne.  Their  names 
are  indicated  exactly  as  on  the  tapestry,  with  the  words  "Eneas  pius 
papa"  and  "Fridericus  tercius  romanorum  imperator."  On  the  next 
page  begins  the  prooemium  of  Eneas'  book.  On  the  right  side  of 
the  tapestry  is  represented  one  of  the  electors  of  the  Empire,  the 
"Palatinus  Reni,"  the  Count  of  the  Palatinate;  on  the  left  side  an- 
other elector,  the  "Marchio  Brandenburgensis,"  the  Margrave  of 
Brandenburg.  The  Count  of  the  Palatinate  holds  three  dishes  in  his 
hands  which  do  not  refer  (as  stated  by  C.  H.  W.)  to  the  Coronation 
Ceremony  of  Frederick  III,  but  are  the  usual  attribute  of  the  Count 
of  the  Palatinate,  as  "Dapifer,"  or  cupbearer  of  the  Holy  Roman 

188 


X 


O    M 


« 


>  d 


W  '^ 


►n 


Empire.  At  the  foot  of  this  personage  is  a  shield  with  a  coat 
of  arms  which  even  the  experience  in  heraldics  of  Mr.  Robert 
T.  Nichol  of  the  Metropolitan  Museum  was  not  able  to  identify. 
The  Margrave  of  Brandenburg  holding  the  key,  the  symbol  of  the 
Chamberlain  of  the  Empire,  is  very  strangely  represented  with  the 
coat  of  arms  of  Saxony.  We  do  not  need  to  go  into  a  long  historical 
research  about  the  different  branches  of  the  Ascanian  family  which 
reigned  in  Brandenburg  and  Saxony,  to  explain  this  anomaly.  The 
explanation  is  much  simpler.  Both  figures  are  copied  from  a  wood- 
cut (Fig.  5)  in  Hartman  Schedel's  Chronicle,  folios  283b  and  284a 
which  illustrates  the  chapter  "de  Institutione  electorum  imperii," 
and  on  which  all  the  electors  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  are  repre- 
sented. In  Hartman  Schedel's  woodcut  the  Palatinus  Reni  has 
the  correct  coat  of  arms  with  a  rampant  lion.  The  Margrave  of 
Brandenburg  has  the  correct  coat  of  arms  of  the  red  eagle  of  Bran- 
denburg to  his  right.  To  his  left  stands  the  Duke  of  Saxony  with 
his  correct  coat  of  arms.  As  our  tapestry  weaver,  for  the  reason  of 
symmetry,  needed  the  Margrave  of  Brandenburg  with  a  shield  to 
his  left,  he  simply  copied  him  with  the  coat  of  arms  of  his  left  neigh- 
bor in  the  Chronicle.  Thus  the  great  historical  problem  of  C.  H.  W. 
explains  itself  in  a  very  simple  way. 

The  three  groups  of  the  tapestry  are  separated  by  Gothic  col- 
umns and  arches.  Above  and  at  the  bottom  is  a  charming  mille-fleur 
decoration.  The  inscriptions  are  exactly  the  same  as  in  the  Chron- 
icle. The(oTc^apeTt1yls^urrounded  by  ^JfBorder  with  naturalistic 
flowers.  We  know  only  the  reproduction  of  this  tapestry,  and  are 
consequently  not  allowed  to  make  a  definite  statement,  but  it  is 
highly  probable  that  this  tapestry  comes  from  the  same  loom  as  that 
of  Miss  Timkin.  The  adjustment  of  elements  from  different  wood- 
cuts of  the  Chronicle  is  identically  the  same  in  both  tapestries.  There 
is  nothing  Flemish  in  it.  Both  tapestries  are  German,  were  made 
after  1493,  the  date  of  the  publication  of  the  Chronicle,  and  to 
judge  from  their  appearance  belong  to  the  late  fifteenth  or  the  very 
early  sixteenth  century. 


191 


ij^lS 


■DA.1^ 


